By Sam Hananel
WASHINGTON (AP) --The Supreme Court on Thursday sided with juice maker Pom Wonderful in its long-running false advertising dispute with Coca Cola, a decision that could open the door to more litigation against food makers for deceptive labeling.
The justices ruled 8-0 that Pom can go forward with a lawsuit alleging the label on a "Pomegranate Blueberry" beverage offered by Coke's Minute Maid unit is misleading because 99 percent of the drink consists of apple and grape juice.
Lower courts had ruled in favor of Coke because the label conforms to Food and Drug Administration laws and regulations. But the Supreme Court reversed, finding that the juice label may technically comply with FDA rules but still be misleading to consumers for different reasons.
Writing for the court, Justice Anthony Kennedy said federal FDA laws and trademark laws complement each other in the regulation of misleading labels. He said it is unlikely Congress intended FDA law to preclude all trademark actions in the food and beverage arena because that would mean "less policing" of misleading labels than in other industries.
Justice Stephen Breyer took no part in the case.
Pom filed its lawsuit in 2008 after it began losing market share to Minute Maid's "Pomegranate Blueberry Flavored Blend of 5 Juices" drink. The drink's label shows the words "Pomegranate Blueberry" in much larger type than the rest of the phrase and includes a prominent picture of large pomegranate set among other fruits. Pom complained that the product actually contained only 0.3 percent pomegranate and 0.2 percent blueberry juice.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Coke, finding that food labeling laws preclude private lawsuits under trademark law.
The food and beverage industry had expressed concerns that a ruling for Pom would lead to greater uncertainty about labeling requirements and lead to a flurry of new lawsuits.
Coke's lawyer claimed during oral arguments that it would be a "logistical nightmare" for food companies to have to change labels in response to every private lawsuit. The beverage giant says the federal government — not competitors — should be enforcing uniform label requirements.
SAG-AFTRA Calls For A Strike Against “League of Legends”
"League of Legends" is caught in the middle of a dispute between Hollywood's actors union and an audio company that provides voiceover services for the blockbuster online multiplayer game.
The Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists called a strike against "League of Legends" on Tuesday, arguing that Formosa Interactive attempted to get around the ongoing video game strike by hiring non-union actors to work on an unrelated title.
Formosa tried to "cancel" the unnamed video game, which was covered by the strike, shortly after the start of the work stoppage, SAG-AFTRA said. The union said when Formosa learned it could not cancel the game, the company "secretly transferred the game to a shell company and sent out casting notices for 'non-union' talent only." In response, the union's interactive negotiating committee voted unanimously to file an unfair labor practice charge against the company with the National Labor Relations Board and to call a strike against "League of Legends" as part of that charge.
"League of Legends" is one of Formosa's most well-known projects. The company provides voiceover services for the game, according to SAG-AFTRA.
SAG-AFTRA has accused Formosa of interfering with protections that allow performers to form or join a union and prevent those performers from being discriminated against — a move the union called "egregious violations of core tenets of labor law."
Formosa did not immediately respond to a request for comment. "League of Legends" developer Riot Games said that the company "has nothing to do" with the union's complaint.
"We want to be clear: Since becoming a union project five years ago, 'League of Legends' has only asked Formosa to engage with union... Read More